IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mgt/youmng/v10y2015i2p111-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Business Ecosystem Definition in Built Environment Using a Stakeholder Assessment Process

Author

Listed:
  • Tuomas Lappi

    (University of Oulu, Finland)

  • Harri Haapasalo

    (University of Oulu, Finland)

  • Kirsi Aaltonen

    (University of Oulu, Finland)

Abstract

Actors and their relationships are core elements of the business ecosystem concept, a trending model of business collaboration emphasizing organizational diversity, relationship dependency and joint evolution. This study approaches a built environment business ecosystem to structure the acknowledged complexity of ecosystem definition by applying a three-step stakeholder assessment process. The process is based on a stakeholder network diagram, Mitchell, Agle, and Wood’s (1997) well-recognized stakeholder salience model and a two-dimensional stakeholder matrix. The assessment process is applied to a school campus case study to define a built environment business ecosystem and the salience of the ecosystem actors. Results, including salience score calculation, validate the applicability of the proposed process. The findings provide novel insights for ecosystem researchers into how stakeholder theory concepts can be applied to broaden the understanding of business ecosystem dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Tuomas Lappi & Harri Haapasalo & Kirsi Aaltonen, 2015. "Business Ecosystem Definition in Built Environment Using a Stakeholder Assessment Process," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 10(2), pages 111-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:mgt:youmng:v:10:y:2015:i:2:p:111-129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.fm-kp.si/zalozba/ISSN/1854-4231/10_111-129.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    2. Dass, Mayukh & Kumar, Shivina, 2014. "Bringing product and consumer ecosystems to the strategic forefront," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 225-234.
    3. Yves Fassin, 2008. "Imperfections and Shortcomings of the Stakeholder Model’s Graphical Representation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(4), pages 879-888, July.
    4. Aaltonen, Kirsi & Kujala, Jaakko, 2010. "A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in global projects," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 381-397, December.
    5. Robert Newcombe, 2003. "From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 841-848.
    6. Stefan Olander, 2007. "Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project management," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 277-287.
    7. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    8. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Romera, A.J. & Bos, A.P. & Neal, M. & Eastwood, C.R. & Chapman, D. & McWilliam, W. & Royds, D. & O'Connor, C. & Brookes, R. & Connolly, J. & Hall, P. & Clinton, P.W., 2020. "Designing future dairy systems for New Zealand using reflexive interactive design," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Lyudmila A. Ramenskaya, 2021. "Interaction between digital platforms and key stakeholders: A content analysis," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 12(5), pages 96-106, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahsan, Dewan & Pedersen, Søren, 2018. "The influence of stakeholder groups in operation and maintenance services of offshore wind farms: Lesson from Denmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 819-828.
    2. Jelena Cvijović & Vladimir Obradović & Marija Todorović, 2021. "Stakeholder Management and Project Sustainability—A Throw of the Dice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    3. Manser, Kristina & Hillebrand, Bas & Driessen, Paul H. & Ziggers, Gerrit Willem & Bloemer, Josée M.M., 2015. "Activity sets in multi-organizational ecologies: a project-level perspective on sustainable energy innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 444-455.
    4. Paul Hong & Stephen K. Callaway & Soon W. Hong, 2016. "Open network innovation in the age of complexity: case for small and medium enterprises," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 65-86.
    5. Wu, Jinxi & Ye, Ran (Michelle) & Ding, Ling & Lu, Chao & Euwema, Martin, 2018. "From “transplant with the soil” toward the establishment of the innovation ecosystem: A case study of a leading high-tech company in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 222-234.
    6. Jaehun Joo & Mike Tae-In Eom & Matthew Minsuk Shin, 2017. "Finding the Missing Link between Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Competitiveness through Social Capital: A Business Ecosystem Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-22, April.
    7. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2020. "Stakeholders’ role in distribution loss reduction technology adoption in the Indian electricity sector: An actor-oriented approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    8. Melissa Garber & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2017. "A Framework for Multiobjective Decision Management with Diverse Stakeholders," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 335-356, July.
    9. Zhongji Yang & Liangqun Qi & Xin Li & Tianxi Wang, 2022. "How Does Successful Catch-Up Occur in Complex Products and Systems from the Innovation Ecosystem Perspective? A Case of China’s High-Speed Railway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    10. Nontando N. Xaba & S’phumelele L. Nkomo & Kirona Harrypersad, 2022. "Whose Knowledge? Examining the Relationship between the Traditional Medicine Sector and Environmental Conservation Using a Stakeholder Analysis: Perceptions on Warwick Herb Market Durban South Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, September.
    11. Rashid Maqbool & Yahya Rashid & Saleha Ashfaq, 2022. "Renewable energy project success: Internal versus external stakeholders' satisfaction and influences of power‐interest matrix," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1542-1561, December.
    12. Ahsan, Dewan & Pedersen, Soren & Bang Nielsen, Mathias Rohwer & Ovesen, Jacob, 2019. "Why does the offshore wind industry need standardized HSE management systems? An evidence from Denmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 691-700.
    13. Wang, Shuli & Shen, Wenxin & Tang, Wenzhe & Wang, Yunhong & Duffield, Colin F. & Hui, Felix Kin Peng, 2019. "Understanding the social network of stakeholders in hydropower project development: An owners' view," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 326-334.
    14. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    15. Ahsan Nawaz & Xing Su & Qaiser Mohi Ud Din & Muhammad Irslan Khalid & Muhammad Bilal & Syyed Adnan Raheel Shah, 2020. "Identification of the H&S (Health and Safety Factors) Involved in Infrastructure Projects in Developing Countries-A Sequential Mixed Method Approach of OLMT-Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.
    17. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    18. Delin Zeng & Jingbo Hu & Taohua Ouyang, 2017. "Managing Innovation Paradox in the Sustainable Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Ambidextrous Capability in a Focal Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    19. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    20. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mgt:youmng:v:10:y:2015:i:2:p:111-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alen Jezovnik (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmkupsi.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.